AXS (10t) cassette longevity

[pmprego]

Hello all,

For the ones using SRAM AXS gruppos, how are your cassettes holding up in terms of longevity?

I was talking to my LBS regarding choosing SRAM axs or the new shimano 12spd and they argued that one disadvantage of the 10t cassette was the wear. Specifically, unless one uses a 48/50 front ring, the 10t sprocket is used a lot and with some significant power when wanting to go fast on the flat and that wears that 10t sprocket quite fast.

Can people here give me their feedback. thanks!

[PoorCyclist]

To give an example

46 front ring 10T cog 90 cadence = 34 mph.

How regularly do you reach that speed under your pedal power and sustain it?

[Maddie]

You need to put down lots of power if you want to use the 10t cog on the flat, even with a 46t chainring. Maybe during a sprint that lasts a couple of seconds. But that will not have a significant effect on wear.
Sram cassettes are known to be very durable and long lasting. Also the 12s ones.

[Hexsense]

That depend on the speed and cadence.
Let say, rider use 46t which is below what your LBS mention.

@80rpm, 46x11 is 43 km/h, 46x10 is 47.5 km/h
@90rpm, 46x11 is 48.5 km/h, 46x10 is 53.5 km/h
@100rpm, 46x11 is 54 km/h, 46x10 is 59.5 km/h
@110rpm, 46x11 is 59 km/h, 46x10 is 65 km/h

If you have especially slow cadence, like 80rpm and the group cruise over 47 km/h a lot then, yeah, you'll use 10t a lot. But if you cruise at 48 km/h and have natural cadence of 110rpm. That'd be 46x13t. Still have 12, 11, 10 cogs to spare.

I know I definitely not travelling at that speed a lot. More like 33-42 km/h.

[jfranci3]

In theory, you should be gearing so the 6th and 7th cogs (middle ones) are at the speed you're going most of the time (MEAN, not avg) if you're a flat lander (I'd look at the spread on the exact cassette you looking at though). You want the chain to be straight and in a 17t or bigger cog. Smaller than 17t, you start losing a notable amount of power (250w basis below - 6w vs conventional gearing). If you're around hills, you gear for the hills, not top end. If you're a 53x11 all the time type of person, then you might want to go with a bigger in front, you'll go faster !


So, the 10t basically lasts forever if you're using the rings in front. With the 12s cassette you end up gearing the same as you would for 10/11sp because of the efficiency loss. They pretty much put the extra gear where you absolutely don't want it. The Rotor 12s cassettes make a lot of sense here, as they give you an extra cog just above where you cruise at rather than the extreme top end.

[pmprego]

That depend on the speed and cadence.
Let say, rider use 46t which is below what your LBS mention.

@80rpm, 46x11 is 43 km/h, 46x10 is 47.5 km/h
@90rpm, 46x11 is 48.5 km/h, 46x10 is 53.5 km/h
@100rpm, 46x11 is 54 km/h, 46x10 is 59.5 km/h
@110rpm, 46x11 is 59 km/h, 46x10 is 65 km/h

If you have especially slow cadence, like 80rpm and the group cruise over 47 km/h a lot then, yeah, you'll use 10t a lot. But if you cruise at 48 km/h and have natural cadence of 110rpm. That'd be 46x13t. Still have 12, 11, 10 cogs to spare.

I know I definitely not travelling at that speed a lot. More like 33-42 km/h.

I hoover around 80-90rpm. I would say that someone with an 80rpm is not a grinder. I usually think of that for someone doing on the 60's.

Using your data, @80rpm and 46x10 is 47.5 km/h is not that high speed (when in a fast group). Nonetheless, I can understand that to hold that speed facing the wind wouldn't be sustainable over a very short period. Thus, a 48x10 jumps the speed to close to 50kmh which makes it a sub-1min effort. Thinking about cadence, ratio and speed I guess that with a correct choice of front ring, the 10T is hardly a problem.

The graph is not a direct comparison of what I'm looking here as they tested 1x vs 2x so there are chain-line questions as well as chain efficiency.

[Steve Curtis]

Hi all.

All of my bikes are now 1x11 or 1x12
The two that are 1x12 both have 10-33 cassettes but one had a 48 chainring and the other is 50.

The terrain is rolling with 12% being about as steep as it gets here.

Not much time is spent in the 10 on an average ride, but it's a nice long gear for downhills, windy days, or kom bashing.
It got going to get worn out any quicker than any other sprocket.

[bobones]

Hello all,

For the ones using SRAM AXS gruppos, how are your cassettes holding up in terms of longevity?

I was talking to my LBS regarding choosing SRAM axs or the new shimano 12spd and they argued that one disadvantage of the 10t cassette was the wear. Specifically, unless one uses a 48/50 front ring, the 10t sprocket is used a lot and with some significant power when wanting to go fast on the flat and that wears that 10t sprocket quite fast.

Can people here give me their feedback. thanks!

I've got AXS on 3 bikes and 11-speed eTap on another. I have yet to replace a cassette due to wear, but then I regularly check for chain wear and have started waxing chains for lube.

One of the cool things about AXS is that there is a nice site which gives you analysis of your gear usage, and looking back at some of my rides, the 10T cog is rarely used, and when it is, the power is low because I am likely to be coasting downhill.

Here are examples from a couple of longer rides. I don't have any chaingang type rides to show, but perhaps someone else here with AXS can post their data.

1. Long hilly sportive using 46/33 with 10-36.





2. 100 miles mixed terrain on 48/35 with 10-33





As an aside, I was out on my 11-speed bike this morning for the first time in a while, which has 52-36 rings and 11-28 cassette, and it was noticeable how much more I was using the FD compared to AXS. I appreciate that there are efficiency losses with smaller cogs and cross chaining, but for everyday general riding in my area, I much prefer the AXS gear ratios as I can ride in the big ring most of the time.

Anyway, of all the reasons not to use AXS I've heard, wear on the 10T has got to be one of the worst. Maybe the LBS was meaning losses from additional chain friction with smaller cogs rather than actual wear?

[MikeD]

In theory, you should be gearing so the 6th and 7th cogs (middle ones) are at the speed you're going most of the time (MEAN, not avg) if you're a flat lander (I'd look at the spread on the exact cassette you looking at though). You want the chain to be straight and in a 17t or bigger cog. Smaller than 17t, you start losing a notable amount of power (250w basis below - 6w vs conventional gearing). If you're around hills, you gear for the hills, not top end. If you're a 53x11 all the time type of person, then you might want to go with a bigger in front, you'll go faster !


So, the 10t basically lasts forever if you're using the rings in front. With the 12s cassette you end up gearing the same as you would for 10/11sp because of the efficiency loss. They pretty much put the extra gear where you absolutely don't want it. The Rotor 12s cassettes make a lot of sense here, as they give you an extra cog just above where you cruise at rather than the extreme top end.

What's the source for this chart?

[pmprego]

...

Very nice info. It is really interesting and addresses my question. Thanks.

It was a long post so I deleted the contents. People can see your own post.

[jfranci3]

In theory, you should be gearing so the 6th and 7th cogs (middle ones) are at the speed you're going most of the time (MEAN, not avg) if you're a flat lander (I'd look at the spread on the exact cassette you looking at though). You want the chain to be straight and in a 17t or bigger cog. Smaller than 17t, you start losing a notable amount of power (250w basis below - 6w vs conventional gearing). If you're around hills, you gear for the hills, not top end. If you're a 53x11 all the time type of person, then you might want to go with a bigger in front, you'll go faster !


So, the 10t basically lasts forever if you're using the rings in front. With the 12s cassette you end up gearing the same as you would for 10/11sp because of the efficiency loss. They pretty much put the extra gear where you absolutely don't want it. The Rotor 12s cassettes make a lot of sense here, as they give you an extra cog just above where you cruise at rather than the extreme top end.

What's the source for this chart?

https://www.velonews.com/gear/gear-issu ... ivetrains/

[DaveS]

A 48/10 is the same as a 53/11. Do you normally wear the 11T first? I spend very little time in my 48/10.

[MikeD]

A 48/10 is the same as a 53/11. Do you normally wear the 11T first? I spend very little time in my 48/10.

There's a 6 watts difference between those gears. That seems like a lot considering that people choose tires, tubes, and even chain lube to save less watts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jfranci3]

Keep in mind, the above chart is 11sp / 12sp(mtb) efficenecy. SRAM 12sp road with the flattop chain would likely be slightly more efficent because the larger roller will make the chain link pivot around a larger radius. (7.9mm roller vs 7.65mm , so .125mm larger radius) It's not much, but it's something (maybe as much as 1w though once the coating is broken in). ( There's a 12sp Flat Top chain test out there, but that was run on a 11sp test machine and the chain isn't the drivetrain. )

10t = 23.35mm radius
11t = 24.4mm radius